Scan barcode
A review by mafiabadgers
The Return of the King by J.R.R. Tolkien
4.0
First read 03/2021, reread 09/2024
Book 5. Much like book 3, there's a good deal of running around and hacking up of enemies, but this time with less focus on the inherent evil of orcs (instead we are given a number of unpleasant asides about the Southrons), and a great deal more abstraction. With the great cloud of gloom sent forth from Mordor and the relatively small amount of page space given over to battles, as opposed to preparation and aftermath, it cleaves more closely to the metaphorical fight of good and evil than to a more grounded combat, which I think fits very well with the style of narration. It's as much about Éomer's grief as it is about anyone's heroic exploits, which is just as it should be.
Book 6. Not my favourite book, but perhaps the most interesting. It begins with Sam and Frodo doing a lot of walking and being sad, rather like book four, but this time without Gollum to enliven things. The resolution of the first third of the book, though, is excellent. The second third is a recuperative period, and about what you'd expect at this point. Is Faramir's relationship with Éowyn a touching aside about healing and growth, or patriarchal claptrap about her submission to a man's wisdom, and relinquishing her role as shieldmaiden? Perhaps a little of each. But the last third, when the Travellers return to the Shire? It's difficult. It's not the reward our heroes seem to have earned. But it's also resolved fairly tidily, and "it happily cost very few lives", by which Tolkien means that he's not interested in dwelling on the deaths involved. Removing all this would certainly bring the book to a cleaner conclusion, but I'm not sure it would be better. All the same, as it stands, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The hobbits' xenophobic tendencies are validated by the results of this incursion of highly racialised outsiders, and they are then rebuffed by the return of some of their own, and the rounding up of the locals to run them off their land. As I see it, it was the hobbits' small-mindedness, the suspicion of any who do things differently and the desire to control them, that enabled Saruman's influence to gain traction in the Shire. What sort of ostracism might the Travellers have faced, had they not saved the day quite so visibly? The ending also roundedly condemns industrialisation, rather than critiquing its implementation and the possible uses for it if enacted in a fashion that cares for the workers and the land. Issues that have been glossed over before have at last come to the fore, and it's dissatisfying. I did tear up at all the gardening, though, so that's something.
Overall, books 4 and 5 were my favourites, then 3, then 2, then 1. No idea where I'd put 6.
As for the appendices, well. I actually didn't have the heart to read them in 2021, and I do slightly regret not getting the bonus material about Aragorn and Arwen, or Sam's seven terms as Mayor and thirteen children. On the other hand, I hate linguistics.
Book 5. Much like book 3, there's a good deal of running around and hacking up of enemies, but this time with less focus on the inherent evil of orcs (instead we are given a number of unpleasant asides about the Southrons), and a great deal more abstraction. With the great cloud of gloom sent forth from Mordor and the relatively small amount of page space given over to battles, as opposed to preparation and aftermath, it cleaves more closely to the metaphorical fight of good and evil than to a more grounded combat, which I think fits very well with the style of narration. It's as much about Éomer's grief as it is about anyone's heroic exploits, which is just as it should be.
Book 6. Not my favourite book, but perhaps the most interesting. It begins with Sam and Frodo doing a lot of walking and being sad, rather like book four, but this time without Gollum to enliven things. The resolution of the first third of the book, though, is excellent. The second third is a recuperative period, and about what you'd expect at this point. Is Faramir's relationship with Éowyn a touching aside about healing and growth, or patriarchal claptrap about her submission to a man's wisdom, and relinquishing her role as shieldmaiden? Perhaps a little of each. But the last third, when the Travellers return to the Shire? It's difficult. It's not the reward our heroes seem to have earned. But it's also resolved fairly tidily, and "it happily cost very few lives", by which Tolkien means that he's not interested in dwelling on the deaths involved. Removing all this would certainly bring the book to a cleaner conclusion, but I'm not sure it would be better. All the same, as it stands, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The hobbits' xenophobic tendencies are validated by the results of this incursion of highly racialised outsiders, and they are then rebuffed by the return of some of their own, and the rounding up of the locals to run them off their land. As I see it, it was the hobbits' small-mindedness, the suspicion of any who do things differently and the desire to control them, that enabled Saruman's influence to gain traction in the Shire. What sort of ostracism might the Travellers have faced, had they not saved the day quite so visibly? The ending also roundedly condemns industrialisation, rather than critiquing its implementation and the possible uses for it if enacted in a fashion that cares for the workers and the land. Issues that have been glossed over before have at last come to the fore, and it's dissatisfying. I did tear up at all the gardening, though, so that's something.
Overall, books 4 and 5 were my favourites, then 3, then 2, then 1. No idea where I'd put 6.
As for the appendices, well. I actually didn't have the heart to read them in 2021, and I do slightly regret not getting the bonus material about Aragorn and Arwen, or Sam's seven terms as Mayor and thirteen children. On the other hand, I hate linguistics.